First it was 9th match, then the 15th, then the 2xth… I don’t believe it before it comes out. All the “leaks” (Fnac, etc …) imply that the date of release is coming closer though 😀
True, but some feel compelled to own software and simply refuse to take advantage of the subscription software even thought is represents a better value.
Considering it’s been nearly two years since the last major release, it’s cheaper to buy the standalone and use it for two OR MORE years. The upgrade fee will likely be cheaper than a rental to.
Photoshop isn’t actually required anymore by most photographers. Elements is more than capable and so is free software like gimp.
64 bit, offloads processing to graphics card(s), facial recognition and HDR (without Photoshop) – all of this will bring value to some in terms of time savings. I expect a big leap in performance on my computer and it cannot come soon enough.
The problem with a HDR function is that it needs to be a pretty great HDR tool in order for it to be usable. Else blending or using luma masks is still the preferred solution to increase DR. Photoshops current ‘Merge to 32-bit HDR’ is quite bad at handling ghosting and if that’s any indication so will Lightrooms version of it.
Would be much better if they created a tool to blend and handle luminosity masks from X different images.
The rest is good though (except face recognition that makes it feel like they want LR to be a amateur tool).
I agree the photoshop tool is pretty lousy. If I don’t do it manually, I use photomatix over photoshop but for a simple exposure blending job in a pinch I foresee this feature saving some time. It can’t be worse than the photoshop version at the least.
If dropping 32bit support means reallocating resources for other benefits (such as utilizing graphics cards – which is the biggest selling point for me), I consider it a feature not a loss. Nonetheless thanks for the info.
You are a mouse nibbling at some cheap cheese on a trap. Others are more forward thinking and anticipate where the trend will lead to. It’s Darwinism in action.
This has been discussed since CC was first announced… if you upgrade at every major release then the subscription will be more worth it. If you skip a release or more then buying perpetual license is more worth it.
Almost 2 years subscription is more than the perpetual license. Lightroom 5 has been around for nearly two years. If you sub’ed you’d be paying nearly double. Adobe will have to increase pricing of their sub once enough people have subscribed as their profits have cratered since releasing creative cloud. Once they have done that you’l miss the perpetual license pricing.
What I do know is the Brits will be ripped off on the price as usual and that old turkey about doing business in the UK etc..It is almost exclusively a download from American servers..
Subscription or not, It’s still just a license. You don’t own anything anyway.
I subscripe to the whole Adobe CC package,
I do not use all Adobe CC apps, but enough that I find it to be a good deal.
Always updated apps at a fixed monthly cost.
You can say that 54 EUR/60 USD is expensive, but if you do business and earn 100 EUR/125 USD per hour it is a very good deal.
22 Responses
First it was 9th match, then the 15th, then the 2xth… I don’t believe it before it comes out. All the “leaks” (Fnac, etc …) imply that the date of release is coming closer though 😀
I have LR5 and do not need LR6. What is the added value? Just increasing Adobe´s revenue?
129 euro?? cheaper to buy a photshop subscription for one year then if it is included like the 5 is now
True, but some feel compelled to own software and simply refuse to take advantage of the subscription software even thought is represents a better value.
Considering it’s been nearly two years since the last major release, it’s cheaper to buy the standalone and use it for two OR MORE years. The upgrade fee will likely be cheaper than a rental to.
Photoshop isn’t actually required anymore by most photographers. Elements is more than capable and so is free software like gimp.
Go figure it out. I am looking forward to it.
You know I cannot be arsed to figure out what ‘go figure out’ actually means. Can anyone help please?
64 bit, offloads processing to graphics card(s), facial recognition and HDR (without Photoshop) – all of this will bring value to some in terms of time savings. I expect a big leap in performance on my computer and it cannot come soon enough.
The problem with a HDR function is that it needs to be a pretty great HDR tool in order for it to be usable. Else blending or using luma masks is still the preferred solution to increase DR. Photoshops current ‘Merge to 32-bit HDR’ is quite bad at handling ghosting and if that’s any indication so will Lightrooms version of it.
Would be much better if they created a tool to blend and handle luminosity masks from X different images.
The rest is good though (except face recognition that makes it feel like they want LR to be a amateur tool).
Check out HDRmerge. Merges exposures in RAW (convert to DNG first), outputs RAW, and eliminates most ghosting problems.
I agree the photoshop tool is pretty lousy. If I don’t do it manually, I use photomatix over photoshop but for a simple exposure blending job in a pinch I foresee this feature saving some time. It can’t be worse than the photoshop version at the least.
A 64-bit version of Lightroom 5 (as with 4) was also included with the 32-bit version.
Lightroom 6 is merely 64-bit *only*. In this respect, it’s a *loss* of a compatibility feature… but not one that many people should miss these days.
If dropping 32bit support means reallocating resources for other benefits (such as utilizing graphics cards – which is the biggest selling point for me), I consider it a feature not a loss. Nonetheless thanks for the info.
Will there be a special upgrade price from 5 to 6 ?
don’t they usually have a beta program well before actual release?
You are a mouse nibbling at some cheap cheese on a trap. Others are more forward thinking and anticipate where the trend will lead to. It’s Darwinism in action.
This has been discussed since CC was first announced… if you upgrade at every major release then the subscription will be more worth it. If you skip a release or more then buying perpetual license is more worth it.
I bought LR 4 and upgradet to 5, now i will upgrade to 6. and i will also get the 7 in the future,maybe i should start subscribing..
Almost 2 years subscription is more than the perpetual license. Lightroom 5 has been around for nearly two years. If you sub’ed you’d be paying nearly double. Adobe will have to increase pricing of their sub once enough people have subscribed as their profits have cratered since releasing creative cloud. Once they have done that you’l miss the perpetual license pricing.
it’s funny because it’s already with a promotion price haha
What I do know is the Brits will be ripped off on the price as usual and that old turkey about doing business in the UK etc..It is almost exclusively a download from American servers..
Subscription or not, It’s still just a license. You don’t own anything anyway.
I subscripe to the whole Adobe CC package,
I do not use all Adobe CC apps, but enough that I find it to be a good deal.
Always updated apps at a fixed monthly cost.
You can say that 54 EUR/60 USD is expensive, but if you do business and earn 100 EUR/125 USD per hour it is a very good deal.